Behaviourism

Group memebers: Stanley, Han Rui, Jin Jie

The school of psychology maintains that behaviors as such can be described scientifically without recourse either to internal physiological events or to hypothetical constructs such as the mind. Behaviorism comprises the position that all theories should have observational correlates but that there are no philosophical differences between publicly observable processes (such as actions) and privately observable processes (such as thinking and feeling).
 * Behaviorism** or **Behaviourism**, also called the **learning perspective** (where any physical action is a behavior) is a philosophy of psychology based on the proposition that all things which organisms do— including acting, thinking and feeling—can and should be regarded as behaviors.

[]

Three Types of Behaviorism 1.Methodological behaviorism is a normative theory about the scientific conduct of psychology. It claims that psychology should concern itself with the behavior of organisms (human and nonhuman animals). Psychology should not concern itself with mental states or events or with constructing internal information processing accounts of behavior. According to methodological behaviorism, reference to mental states, such as an animal's beliefs or desires, adds nothing to what psychology can and should understand about the sources of behavior. Mental states are private entities which, given the necessary publicity of science, do not form proper objects of empirical study. Methodological behaviorism is a dominant theme in the writings of John Watson (1878-1958).

Psychological behaviorism is a research program within psychology. It purports to explain human and animal behavior in terms of external physical stimuli, responses, learning histories, and (for certain types of behavior) reinforcements. Psychological behaviorism is present in the work of Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936), Edward Thorndike (1874-1949), as well as Watson. Its fullest and most influential expression is B. F. Skinner's (1904-90) work on schedules of reinforcement. To illustrate, consider a food-deprived rat in an experimental chamber. If a particular movement, such as pressing a lever when a light is on, is followed by the presentation of food, then the likelihood of the rat's pressing the lever when hungry, again, and the light is on, is increased. Such presentations are reinforcements, such lights are (discriminative) stimuli, such lever pressings are responses, and such trials or associations are learning histories.

Analytical or logical behaviorism is a theory within philosophy about the meaning or semantics of mental terms or concepts. It says that the very idea of a mental state or condition is the idea of a behavioral disposition or family of behavioral tendencies. When we attribute a belief, for example, to someone, we are not saying that he or she is in a particular internal state or condition. Instead, we are characterizing the person in terms of what he or she might do in particular situations or environmental interactions. Analytical behaviorism may be found in the work of Gilbert Ryle (1900-76) and the later work of Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-51). More recently, the philosopher-psychologist U. T. Place (1924-2000) advocated a brand of analytical behaviorism restricted to intentional or representational states of mind, such as beliefs, which Place took to constitute a type, although not the only type, of mentality (see Graham and Valentine 2004). Arguably, a version of analytical or logical behaviorism may also be found in the work of Daniel Dennett on the ascription of states of consciousness via a method he calls ‘heterophenomenology’

Roots of Behaviorism Each of methodological, psychological, and analytical behaviorism has historical foundations.

Analytical behaviorism traces its historical roots to the philosophical movement known as Logical Positivism (see Smith 1986). Logical positivism proposes that the meaning of statements used in science be understood in terms of experimental conditions or observations that verify their truth. This positivist doctrine is known as “verificationism.” In psychology, verificationism underpins or grounds analytical behaviorism, namely, the claim that mental concepts refer to behavioral tendencies and so must be translated into behavioral terms.

Analytical behaviorism helps to avoid substance dualism. Substance dualism is the doctrine that mental states take place in a special, non-physical mental substance (the immaterial mind). By contrast, for analytical behaviorism, the belief that I have as I arrive on time for a 2pm dental appointment, namely, that I have a 2pm appointment, is not the property of a mental substance. Believing is a family of tendencies of my body. In addition, for an analytical behaviorist, we cannot identify the belief about my arrival independently of that arrival or other members of this family of tendencies. So, we also cannot treat it as the cause of the arrival. Cause and effect are, as Hume taught, conceptually distinct existences. Believing that I have a 2pm appointment is not distinct from my arrival and so cannot be the cause of the arrival.

Psychological behaviorism's historical roots consist, in part, in the classical associationism of the British Empiricists, foremost John Locke (1632-1704) and David Hume (1711-76). According to classical associationism, intelligent behavior is the product of associative learning. As a result of associations or pairings between perceptual experiences or stimulations on the one hand, and ideas or thoughts on the other, persons and animals acquire knowledge of their environment and how to act. Associations enable creatures to discover the causal structure of the world. Association is most helpfully viewed as the acquisition of knowledge about relations between events. Intelligence in behavior is a mark of such knowledge. Classical associationism relied on introspectible entities, such as perceptual experiences or stimulations as the first links in associations, and thoughts or ideas as the second links. Psychological behaviorism, motivated by experimental interests, claims that to understand the origins of behavior, reference to stimulations (experiences) should be replaced by reference to stimuli (physical events in the environment), and that reference to thoughts or ideas should be eliminated or displaced in favor of reference to responses (overt behavior). Psychological behaviorism is associationism without appeal to mental events.

Behaviorism stumbled upon various critical difficulties with some of its commitments. One difficulty is confusion about the effects of reinforcement on behavior. In its original sense, a stimulus such as food is a reinforcer only if its presentation increases the frequency of a response in a type of associative conditioning known as operant conditioning. A problem with this definition is that it defines reinforcers as stimuli that change behavior. The presentation of food, however, may have no observable effect on response frequency even in cases in which an animal is food deprived. Rather, response frequency can be associated with an animal's ability to identify and remember temporal or spatial properties of the circumstances in which a stimulus is presented. This and other difficulties prompted changes in behaviorism's commitments and new directions of research. One recent and fresh direction has been the study of the role of short term memory in contributing to reinforcement effects on the so-called trajectory of behavior (see Killeen 1994). Another stumbling block, in the case of analytical behaviorism, is the fact that the behavioral sentences that are intended to offer the behavioral paraphrases of mental terms almost always use mental terms themselves (see Chisholm 1957). In the example of my belief that I have a 2pm dental appointment, one must also speak of my desire to arrive at 2pm, otherwise the behavior of arriving at 2pm could not count as believing that I have a 2pm appointment. The term “desire” is a mental term. Critics have charged that we can never escape from using mental terms in the characterization of the meaning of mental terms. This suggests that mental discourse cannot be displaced by behavioral discourse. At least it cannot be displaced term-by-term. Perhaps analytical behaviorists need to paraphrase a whole swarm of mental terms at once so as to recognize the presumption that the attribution of any one such mental term presupposes the application of others

[]

media type="youtube" key="IRjElTMXkXE" height="344" width="425"


 * __Burrhus Frederic Skinner Behavioural Theory__**

The theory of B.F. Skinner is based upon the idea that learning is a function of change in overt behavior. Changes in behavior are the result of an individual's response to events (stimuli) that occur in the environment. A response produces a consequence such as defining a word, hitting a ball, or solving a math problem. When a particular Stimulus-Response (S-R) pattern is reinforced (rewarded), the individual is conditioned to respond. Skinner identified three types of responses or operant that can follow behaviour. •  **Neutral operants**: responses from the environment that neither increase nor decrease the probability of a behaviour being repeated. •  **Reinforcers**: Responses from the environment that increase the probability of a behaviour being repeated. Reinforcers can be either positive or negative. •  **Punishers**: Response from the environment that decrease the likelihood of a behaviour being repeated. Punishment weakens behaviour.

Reinforcement is the key element in Skinner's S-R theory. A reinforcer is anything that strengthens the desired response. It could be verbal praise, a good grade or a feeling of increased accomplishment or satisfaction. In his theory, he covers both positive and negative reinforcement.


 * __[[image:http://www.simplypsychology.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/skinner%20box.jpg width="525" height="303"]]

Positive reinforcement__**

Skinner showed how positive reinforcement worked by placing a hungry rat in his Skinner box. The box contained a lever in the side and as the rat moved about the box it would accidentally knock the lever. Immediately it did so a food pellet would drop into a container next to the lever. The rats quickly learned to go straight to the lever after a few times of being put in the box. The consequence of receiving food if they pressed the lever ensured that they would repeat the action again and again.

Positive reinforcement strengthens a behaviour by providing a consequence an individual finds rewarding. For example, if your teacher gives you £5 each time you complete your homework (i.e. a reward) you are more likely to repeat this behaviour in the future, thus strengthening the behaviour of completing your homework.


 * __Negative reinforcement__**

Skinner showed how negative reinforcement worked by placing a rat in his Skinner box and then subjecting it to an unpleasant electric current which caused it some discomfort. As the rat moved about the box it would accidentally knock the lever. Immediately it did so the electric current would be switched off. The rats quickly learned to go straight to the lever after a few times of being put in the box. The consequence of **escaping** the electric current ensured that they would repeat the action again and again. In fact Skinner even taught the rats to **avoid** the electric current by turning on a light just before the electric current came on. The rats soon learned to press the lever when the light came on because they knew that this would stop the electric current being switched on. These two learned responses are known as **Escape Learning and Avoidance Learning**.


 * __Punishment (weakens behaviour)__**

Punishment is defined as the opposite of reinforcement since it is designed to weaken or eliminate a response rather than increase it. Like reinforcement, punishment can work either by directly applying an unpleasant stimulus like a shock after a response or by removing a potentially rewarding stimulus, for instance, deducting someone’s pocket money to punish undesirable behaviour.

media type="youtube" key="I_ctJqjlrHA" height="344" width="425"

[] []


 * __Ivan Pavlov's Classical Conditioning__**

//-Classical conditioning is Stimulus (S) elicits >Response (R) conditioning since the antecedent stimulus (singular) causes (elicits) the reflexive or involuntary response to occur.//
 * //Major concepts of classical conditioning//**
 * Simplified: Classical conditioning starts with a reflex: an innate, involuntary behavior elicited or caused by an antecedent environmental event**
 * __Example__:** if air is blown into your eye, you blink. You have no voluntary or conscious control over whether the blink occurs or not.

The specific model for classical conditioning is:
 * 1) __Unconditioned Stimulus (US)__ elicits > Unconditioned Response (UR): a stimulus will naturally (without learning) elicit or bring about a relexive response
 * 2) __Neutral Stimulus (NS)__ ---> does not elicit the response of interest: this stimulus (sometimes called an orienting stimulus as it elicits an orienting response) is a neutral stimulus since it does not elicit the Unconditioned (or reflexive) Response.
 * 3) The __Neutral Stimulus (NS)__ is repeatedly paired with the Unconditioned/Natural Stimulus (US).
 * 4) The NS is transformed into a __Conditioned Stimulus (CS);__ that is, when the CS is presented by itself, it elicits or causes the CR (which is the same involuntary response as the UR; the name changes because it is elicited by a different stimulus. This is written CS elicits > CR.

1.No new behaviours learn during classical conditioning 2.An association is developed between NS and US so that the animal / person responds to both events / stimuli (plural) in the same way 3.After conditioning, both the US and the CS will elicit the same involuntary response

UCS--> **__U__**nconditioned **__S__**timulus UCR-> **__U__**nconditioned **__R__**esponse NS--> **__N__**eutral **__S__**timulus CS--> **__C__**onditioned **__S__**timulus
 * __Before Conditioning__**


 * __During Conditioning__**

__**
 * __After Conditioning


 * __Uses of Classical Conditioning in the Classroom__**
 * classical conditioning primarily influences emotional behavior
 * Things that make us happy, sad, angry, etc. become associated with neutral stimuli that gain our attention
 * example, if a particular academic subject or remembering a particular teacher produces emotional feelings in you, those emotions are probably a result of classical conditioning.

media type="youtube" key="cP5lCleK-PM" height="344" width="425" media type="youtube" key="Eo7jcI8fAuI" height="344" width="425" [|http://www.youtube.com.html] [] [] [|<< First][|< Previous][|Next >][|Last >>]